Regulations for Handling Disputes over the Application and Evaluation Procedures for Cases Concerning Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects Article 18
The review of a complaint may be conducted only with written files.The Complaint Review Board may, ex officio or upon request, inform a complainant, the authority in charge, and related third parties to present their opinions orally at a designated place.When reviewing a complaint, the Complaint Review Board may request any authority, school, or group having the relevant expertise and experience to conduct appraisal, and may invite scholars, experts, or persons concerned to give explanation during the review, or ask the authority in charge or the complainant to provide the relevant documents or data.A scholar or expert set forth in the preceding paragraph shall recuse himself/herself from participating in reviewing a complaint in any of the following circumstances:1. The scholar or expert is one of the parties, or the spouse or a relative by blood or marriage of either party within the third degree of kinship, or a relative living together with and sharing the property of that party.2. The scholar or expert has processed or supervised the processing of the case about which the complaint is lodged.3. The scholar or expert has participated in handling protests in connection with the same case.4. There is an employment relationship, mandate or agency relationship between the scholar or expert or his/her spouse and the applicant, the responsible person of the applicant, or the authority in charge, or such relationship existed in the last three years.5. There is solid evidence to prove that the scholar or expert is likely to fail to justly perform duties.If a scholar or expert who is in any of the above circumstances fails to recuse himself/herself from handling a complaint, the complainant may petition for disqualification of the scholar or expert, or the chairperson may disqualify the scholar or expert from the case.
中文原文 民間參與公共建設申請及審核程序爭議處理規則第18條
申訴得僅就書面審議之。
申訴會得依職權或申請，通知申訴人、主辦機關及利害關係人到指定場所陳述意見。
申訴會於審議時，得囑託具專門知識經驗之機關、學校、團體或人員鑑定，並得邀請學者、專家或相關人士到場說明，或請主辦機關、申訴人提供相關文件、資料。
前項學者、專家就申訴事件有下列各款情形之一者，應行迴避：
一、該事件涉及本人、配偶、三親等以內血親或姻親或同財共居親屬之利益。
二、曾為該事件之承辦或監辦人員。
三、曾參與該事件之異議處理。
四、本人或其配偶與申請人或其負責人、主辦機關間現有或三年內曾有僱傭、委任或代理關係。
五、有其他情形足認其有不能公正執行職務之虞。
前項人員應行迴避而未迴避者，申訴人得申請其迴避或由申訴會主任委員令其迴避。
申訴會得依職權或申請，通知申訴人、主辦機關及利害關係人到指定場所陳述意見。
申訴會於審議時，得囑託具專門知識經驗之機關、學校、團體或人員鑑定，並得邀請學者、專家或相關人士到場說明，或請主辦機關、申訴人提供相關文件、資料。
前項學者、專家就申訴事件有下列各款情形之一者，應行迴避：
一、該事件涉及本人、配偶、三親等以內血親或姻親或同財共居親屬之利益。
二、曾為該事件之承辦或監辦人員。
三、曾參與該事件之異議處理。
四、本人或其配偶與申請人或其負責人、主辦機關間現有或三年內曾有僱傭、委任或代理關係。
五、有其他情形足認其有不能公正執行職務之虞。
前項人員應行迴避而未迴避者，申訴人得申請其迴避或由申訴會主任委員令其迴避。